English refereeing's darkest day?

cson

As reactionary threads go, this is right up there.

The darkest day? Get a grip ffs.

Lawrence1895

Sometimes I think, Suarez could be shot by the opposition, and nothing will happen :rolleyes:

*gets coat*

AdamD

Lars1916 wrote: »

Sometimes I think, Suarez could be shot by the opposition, and nothing will happen :rolleyes:

*gets coat*

One can only hope

The_Kew_Tour

Motherwell v Hibs from Friday night.

Motherwell have clear Goal over the line ruled out and waved play one. Hibs get penalty when player is clearly 2 yards outside the box. Hibs get another Penalty for the slightest nudge on the back by Motherwell Keeper on Hibs Striker.

2 Penalties against them and perfect Goal disallowed when game was 1-0 to Hibs

Did you see Motherwell fans proclaim "Darkest Refereeing Day in Scottish Football"??

By **** you didnt. Made of harder stuff then you lot.

J. Marston

el dude wrote: »

It's a bit like the whole Jimmy Saville thing. Only after everything comes out will people turn around and see how blind they were.

It's gone on too long and there's too many examples for it to be coincidence.

Ah yes, a football team getting an offside goal is obviously comparable in terms of cover-ups to a sex predator.

MyBrokenKnees

AdamD wrote: »

One can only hope

That another human being that play's a sport gets shot? or that he gets his coat?

The_Kew_Tour

J. Marston wrote: »

Ah yes, a football team getting an offside goal is obviously comparable in terms of cover-ups to a sex predator.

Of course it is when its United. Did you not know.;)

thegreengoblin

Absolute joke of a thread title.

People are dealing with emotions rather than facts.

1. Torres shouldn't even have been on the pitch when he was sent off but how much about that will we hear about tomorrow?
2.Torres clearly did not go down when there was contact, he delayed his decision - albeit quicker than most of the others - to fall over but he didn't get away with it. Tough.
3. Hernandez was offside but he got back so quickly and in such an unorthodox way that no linesman in the world was going to get that one right.
4. Suarez was onside, no doubt about it. Karma is such a bitch isn't it?

NeVeR

Ok the Liverpool goal was a goal..

But if it was given would this thread exist ? - I think not -

muffler

Dear oh dear. Its no wonder I dont frequent the soccer forum when I see threads like this obviously started and promoted by either Chelsea and/or Liverpool fans.

Grow a pair lads.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

LOL at the Chelsea fans complaining about bad refereeing, didn't do much complaining in a few of the recent Spurs - Chelsea games..

A bad set of double standards.

These things happen in football, sometimes they go against you, other times they don't, build a bridge, and get over it.

Lawrence1895

In some lower leagues in Germany, they play on ash, no diving whatsoever...just to mention

Lukker-

THFC wrote: »

LOL at the Chelsea fans complaining about bad refereeing, didn't do much complaining in a few of the recent Spurs - Chelsea games..

A bad set of double standards.

These things happen in football, sometimes they go against you, other times they don't, build a bridge, and get over it.

Don't be bitter, if your team has been affected by these decisions surely you have the right to voice your opinion on an open forum right?

Of course we could just say nothing and leave it at the awful standard it's at.

Chucky the tree

thegreengoblin wrote: »

Absolute joke of a thread title.

People are dealing with emotions rather than facts.

1. Torres shouldn't even have been on the pitch when he was sent off but how much about that will we hear about tomorrow?
2.Torres clearly did not go down when there was contact, he delayed his decision - albeit quicker than most of the others - to fall over but he didn't get away with it. Tough.
3. Hernandez was offside but he got back so quickly and in such an unorthodox way that no linesman in the world was going to get that one right.
4. Suarez was onside, no doubt about it. Karma is such a bitch isn't it?

Certainly isn't for Ashley Young.

s8n

Knee jerk much ?

opr

RAWK is down at the moment so I've limited access to the facts. I'll get back to this thread soon.

Opr

J. Marston

opr wrote: »

RAWK is down at the moment so I've limited access to the facts. I'll get back to this thread soon.

Opr

RAWK? facts? Come on now, I know you're messin' with that one.

The_Kew_Tour

DB21

opr wrote: »

RAWK is down at the moment so I've limited access to the facts. I'll get back to this thread soon.

Opr

RandolphEsq

The referees are only human and don't have the benefit of a replay before they make a decision. Bad decisions happen, now let's move on and stop whinging about referees without coming up with an alternative.

niallo27

J. Marston wrote: »

RAWK? facts? Come on now, I know you're messin' with that one.

That's where all liverpool fans get their opinions and facts from sure, I thought an intelligent fella like you would know that.

niallo27

RandolphEsq wrote: »

The referees are only human and don't have the benefit of a replay before they make a decision. Bad decisions happen, now let's move on and stop whinging about referees without coming up with an alternative.

What alternative is there for Liverpools last minute winner today.

J. Marston

niallo27 wrote: »

That's where all liverpool fans get their opinions and facts from sure, I thought an intelligent fella like you would know that.

Thank you.

Cantona's Collars

opr wrote: »

RAWK is down at the moment so I've limited access to the facts. I'll get back to this thread soon.

Opr

You spelled facts wrong,you have to spell it Rafa Style: "Fachts".

Washington Irving

Thread started highlighting numerous poor refereeing decisions in today's games and Man United fans have taken offence acting as though this thread is somehow specifically criticising their club.

The thread is about the poor standard of refereeing in the Premier League and whether or not it is right for a chief executive of a participating club to be vice chairman of the FA. It just so happened that some of the poor decisions used as examples in the OP benefited United and the current FA vice chairman happens to be CEO of Manchester United.

No one claimed there is a conspiracy, no one called out specific club(s) benefiting from poor decisions yet United fans come in and act as though their club is being singled out. The same questions would be being asked if Chelsea/Arsenal/Liverpool/Spurs etc got the rub the of the green or had chief executives in high positions, as much as some would like to think otherwise

Glico Man

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Here is proof that Lance Armstrong never set foot on moon. I found it on RAWK where I get all me facts

The drugs he took were good enough to get him a few Tour de France wins, but to take him to the moon? Must've been on LSD I guess.

Leiva

Embarrassing stuff in here from parachute posters.

Enter the debate why not ?

The title is a bit crappy but there is substance in the discussions, but no, one liner, immature, colour showing sound bites seems the order of the day.

The_Kew_Tour

aaronh007 wrote: »

The drugs he took were good enough to get him a few Tour de France wins, but to take him to the moon? Must've been on LSD I guess.

lol

Fair play.

Git me good.:):):)

thegreengoblin

SaulGoode9 wrote: »

Thread started highlighting numerous poor refereeing decisions in today's games and Man United fans have taken offence acting as though this thread is somehow specifically criticising their club.

The thread is about the poor standard of refereeing in the Premier League and whether or not it is right for a chief executive of a participating club to be vice chairman of the FA. It just so happened that some of the poor decisions used as examples in the OP benefited United and the current FA vice chairman happens to be CEO of Manchester United.

No one claimed there is a conspiracy, no one called out specific club(s) benefiting from poor decisions yet United fans come in and act as though their club is being singled out. The same questions would be being asked if Chelsea/Arsenal/Liverpool/Spurs etc got the rub the of the green or had chief executives in high positions, as much as some would like to think otherwise

Eh, no they wouldn't

Leiva

thegreengoblin wrote: »

Eh, no they wouldn't

Eh. Yes they would.


I like this game

thegreengoblin

Leiva wrote: »

Embarrassing stuff in here from parachute posters.

Enter the debate why not ?

The title is a bit crappy but there is substance in the discussions, but no, one liner, immature, colour showing sound bites seems the order of the day.

You think? That's the real embarrassing thing about this thread, which has no merit whatsoever. It's all reactionary crapology from people who can't see the wood for the trees.

Lukker-

It seems you can't make comment on any decisions here without getting called a conspiracy theorist?

Conspiracy has nothing to do with it, just piss poor officiating.

Washington Irving

thegreengoblin wrote: »

Eh, no they wouldn't

Yes, they would. I'm sure you'd be one of the first to ask those questions

redzerdrog

Henry Winter‏@henrywinter

#cfc lodge complaint with PL match delegate over "inappropriate language" allegedly used by Clattenburg to two Chelsea players

.

Drumpot

Leiva wrote: »

Embarrassing stuff in here from parachute posters.

Enter the debate why not ?

The title is a bit crappy but there is substance in the discussions, but no, one liner, immature, colour showing sound bites seems the order of the day.

There is substance in the topic, but its naieve and/or convenient to presume that its a coincidence that this thread was written after a United win that came on the back of a controversial winner.

Its also interesting that the OP didnt mention the refs hesitancy to consider two potential penalties to united, that the ref could of actually sent Torres off in the first half and that the ref also booked Valencia for a similar incident to that of Torres (ie he was consistantly poor but the fact that it was a second yellow given to a chelsea player suggests its some sort of bias on the refs behalf) . .

To even infer that this topic is being discussed objectively is bias at best . .

The_Kew_Tour

OK so for you that want a debate.

What do you want done?

Technology? Video Ref? 2 Refs?

The standard is shocking. United got away with murder today. But I have seen worse Ref performances then this(says a lot)

Lukker-

It's like there is one bandwagon calling for blood and then another defending it. You can't have a logical discussion on this board without someone posting a picture in response to poorly worded but valid debate and then comes the circle jerk.

thegreengoblin

SaulGoode9 wrote: »

Yes, they would. I'm sure you'd be one of the first to ask those questions

Actually no I wouldn't. Going on about 'dark days' when all that's happened is ONE really bad decision in the Merseyside derby is schoolboy stuff. I'm scarlet for ya...:o

niallo27

zerks wrote: »

You spelled facts wrong,you have to spell it Rafa Style: "Fachts".

I miss Rafa, he wound utd fans and mr. Ferguson up to the last.

CSF

Terrible thread, big refereeing decisions are made both wrong and right every weekend of the season in every league.

This one just happened to feature contrasting fortunes of decisions involving the 2 most barstool supported clubs in this country so of course there is going to be a clamour for video technology. If it'd been the Newcastle-West Brom game and Southampton-Spurs? Nah I don't think so.

Zebra3

Ares wrote: »

A black day today for English football.

Liverpool with a fine goal in the 93rd minute disallowed for a wrong offside when none existed.

Fernando Torres sent off for a non existant dive after being taken out of it by Johnny Evans.

Javier Hernandez winner being allowed despite him being quite a bit offside.

English refereeing's darkest day?

Two of the three decisions you've highlighted were made by the linesmen. Maybe you should understand the game more before starting stupid threads. :rolleyes:

Anyway, Liverpool's goal should have been disallowed. The player who headed the ball down was all over the Everton defender.

The margin of offside for the Man Utd goal was very marginal and in such a case the officals, if in any doubt, are obliged to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side.

That's the rules.

The_Kew_Tour

CSF wrote: »

Terrible thread, big refereeing decisions are made both wrong and right every weekend of the season in every league.

This one just happened to feature contrasting fortunes of decisions involving the 2 most barstool supported clubs in this country so of course there is going to be a clamour for video technology. If it'd been the Newcastle-West Brom game and Southampton-Spurs? Nah I don't think so.

+1

niallo27

Zebra3 wrote: »

English refereeing's darkest day?

Two of the three decisions you've highlighted were made by the linesmen. Maybe you should understand the game more before starting stupid threads. :rolleyes:

Anyway, Liverpool's goal should have been disallowed. The player who headed the ball down was all over the Everton defender.

The margin of offside for the Man Utd goal was very marginal and in such a case the officals, if in any doubt, are obliged to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side.

That's the rules.

They are not linesmen anymore, they are assistant refs.

gerryo777

niallo27 wrote: »

What alternative is there for Liverpools last minute winner today.

A TMO like they have in rugby. Takes about 30 seconds and is only used when the ref or the linesman haven't had a clear view of a scoring opportunity.

killwill

Leiva wrote: »

Eh. Yes they would.


I like this game

The same questions were not asked when Dein was VC.

CSF

gerryo777 wrote: »

A TMO like they have in rugby. Takes about 30 seconds and is only used when the ref or the linesman haven't had a clear view of a scoring opportunity.

And when do you do it? The next time the ball gos out of play or do you stop the game?

eigrod

Zebra3 wrote: »

Anyway, Liverpool's goal should have been disallowed. The player who headed the ball down was all over the Everton defender.

The margin of offside for the Man Utd goal was very marginal and in such a case the officals, if in any doubt, are obliged to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side.

That's the rules.

Haha. How biased are those 2 paragraphs ?

In the case of your 2nd point, there wasn't even 1 player playing Hernandez onside, not to mention the required 2.

killwill

niallo27 wrote: »

I miss Rafa, he wound utd fans and mr. Ferguson up to the last.

Wound himself up a hell of a lot more infairness.

gerryo777

CSF wrote: »

And when do you do it? The next time the ball gos out of play or do you stop the game?

In the Liverpool game today once the ball was in the back of the net, the game could have been stopped to see if Suarez was offside.
The linesman and the ref today had no view of it.

thegreengoblin

niallo27 wrote: »

They are not linesmen anymore, they are assistant refs.

When do you ever hear someone shouting 'Ah jaysus assistant ref!'
They are linesmen..always have and always will be